Dawes writes for the Chiefs. The Chiefs play in the NFL. The NFL is a football league.

So, why is Dawes going off about a baseball player and steriods?

Oh, that's right—so he can once again take a jab at talk radio.

Seriously ... read this thing and tell me what, exactly, was his point.

Last week, former Colorado Rockies broadcaster Wayne Hagin, who now serves in a similar capacity for the St. Louis Cardinals, went on an ESPN radio affiliate in St. Louis and said that former Rockies manager Don Baylor had told him that All-Star Todd Helton used steroids.

“I’m going to say something that is the absolute truth,” Hagin said on the radio for anyone listening to hear, “and he will be mad at me for saying it if it gets out, but Todd Helton, a tremendously gifted baseball player, he tried it.” (Denver Post, March 21, 2005) Just how Hagin could expect it would not get out shows incredible ignorance for someone who makes his living in the radio business.

Almost immediately, Baylor responded denying he said any such thing about steroids in his conversation and that Helton had been suffering from muscle cramps and had been taking creatine, not steroids.

Oh.

In the mixed media age of the 24-hour news cycle, the first impression the public gets is increasingly unedited and live. There is little opportunity, or little desire for a radio host anyway, to leaven anybody’s remarks by other reporting. Realizing the fix he had gotten himself in, Hagin quickly retreated from what he had said. “Things got twisted and misinterpreted,” he said, assuming correctly that Helton was, indeed, mad. “To repeat, I am certain Todd Helton never took steroids. If my words were interpreted any other way, that would be in error and I apologize.” The “absolute truth” had suddenly become anything but that.

Baylor and Helton were shocked and a number of Rockies officials weighed in on the false allegation. How Hagin could believe he had been misinterpreted in what he said is more than a little baffling. “Now I got to do an ESPN interview to deny what I’ve never done,” Helton said in disgust, forced to appear on countless radio and TV programs to defend himself from this scurrilous allegation. (Rocky Mountain News, March 21, 2005). Hagin fessed up that he had confused the talk of “supplements” for steroids and was wrong to use the wording, “juiced up.” Mark Kizla, columnist for the Denver Post, jumped quickly to the defense of Helton writing: “Todd Helton is a 100 percent real baseball hero. The most dangerous substance I’ve ever known Helton to ingest is a fried bologna sandwich.” (Denver Post, March 21, 2005)

Mention the word steroid and lay it on a player who is as clean living and who is reportedly as respected as Helton and suddenly there’s a firestorm of coverage. While Hagin moved quickly to apologize and admit that he had misunderstood Baylor, it was largely too late. Anyone familiar with the media world knows it won’t completely disappear. It will show up from time to time in stories about Helton. The implication will be innocent enough, that he was once labeled as having used steroids, but that will be enough. The talk show hosts or newspaper writers who repeat it will only half remember the story and it will live on.

Given the requisite traits for hosting a sports talk radio program: provocation and the ability to talk incessantly, there should be little doubt about just what business these people are really in. Yet the question persists: are they journalists tracking down stories, commentators whose responsibility it is to explain and interpret current issues and events, or primarily entertainers who hear a buzz word like “steroids” and get lucky enough – in their view anyway – to get some fellow talker who will tell the world that he heard something about a famous person that he didn’t, never mind prove it?

As you read about this latest outrage, think about all the accusations you’ve heard about various people when listening to the radio, think back to the story of President Ronald Reagan’s first Labor Secretary, Raymond Donovan, who was forced to resign his post after numerous rumors that he’d done wrong. After spending more than a million dollars to defend himself, Donovan was cleared of all charges. Coming out of the courtroom to talk to reporters, many of whom had been the first to accuse him, he asked, “Where do I go to get my reputation back?”
Where does Helton go? Not on the radio, if he knows what’s good for him.

MM
~~:shake:

Mr. Laz

03-29-2005, 12:02 PM

Oh, that's right—so he can once again take a jab at talk radio.

MM
~~:shake:
it's why some people think that carl IS rufus

they both have an almost insane hatred of talk radio

AirForceChief

03-29-2005, 12:07 PM

I thought he was a self-professed "media watchdog"? Seriously...

Mark M

03-29-2005, 12:07 PM

it's why some people think that carl IS rufus

they both have an almost insane hatred of talk radio

It's not just a hatred, it's a freaking obsession. They do whatever they can to discredit everyone else just so they can act like they know everything.

While I agree that there are a large number of morons on talk radio, there are morons everywhere, and for the Chiefs to just go on and on and on and on about it is kinda disturbing.

MM
~~:eek:

Mark M

03-29-2005, 12:09 PM

I thought he was a self-professed "media watchdog"? Seriously...

It is called "media watch," but "media discredit" would be a better way to put it.

Hell, this story is a freaking stretch as it is. When one considers that it's on the offical Chiefs site it's even more confusing.

MM
~~:shrug:

keg in kc

03-29-2005, 12:10 PM

It's ironic that you'd find someone on an NFL team's site submitting articles like this. Talk radio is just like televised NFL games: it's all about generating advertising revenue.

And this idea of "infotainment" supplanting journalism isn't limited to talk radio. We have how many 24-hour news channels squirting out the exact same materials with slightly varied 'slant' to fit their intended audience? Apparently the media has decided that we don't want to be educated, we want to be brainwashed, so they provide us with predigested stories that go so far as to tell us how to react to the "news". And, hey, they must be right, because we the sheep all follow our chosen flock. The networks wouldn't be on the air if we didn't. Because, ultimately, the viewers decide what's on, not the people presenting the news. That's why sports is getting tuned out of local evening news broadcasts across the country, for instance, because their ratings tell them their target demographic (housewives) isn't interested.

But I digress.

shaneo69

03-29-2005, 12:20 PM

How does Rufus know that Helton wasn't on "the juice" as Hagin put it? Hagin was just repeating what Baylor told him.

Just like Haslett admitted that 'roids were a big part of football in the '70's and '80's, it's pretty obvious by now that many of the big hitters of the mid-to-late '90's were on the juice.

I guess if it was a total lie, Helton could follow through on his threat to sue Hagin, like those other players threatened to sue Canseco.

But I don't know why Rufus automatically defends the player in this case. Why would Hagin make up something like that?

gblowfish

03-29-2005, 12:21 PM

If anybody ever deserved to wear NUMBER TWO, it's our pal Rufus.

whoman69

03-29-2005, 12:31 PM

Infotainment came from an unusual source, hardcore investigative journalism in the form of 60 minutes. Now don't go all Dan Rather this. When that show came out, it was the zenith of journalism. But the networks saw this show at #1 and learned that the news team could generate ratings. From this moment on, ratings became more important than truth. Conflict is what drives the news these days.

htismaqe

03-29-2005, 12:53 PM

This is a ****ing joke.

Red Dawg

03-29-2005, 03:39 PM

It's not just a hatred, it's a freaking obsession. They do whatever they can to discredit everyone else just so they can act like they know everything.

While I agree that there are a large number of morons on talk radio, there are morons everywhere, and for the Chiefs to just go on and on and on and on about it is kinda disturbing.

MM
~~:eek:

I should post important stuff like Rufus Dawes bullshit.

Mark M

03-29-2005, 03:42 PM

I should post important stuff like Rufus Dawes bullshit.

That would be an improvement from your usual garbage.

Baby steps, he of the useless threads, baby steps ...

MM
~~:p

htismaqe

03-29-2005, 06:55 PM

That would be an improvement from your usual garbage.

Baby steps, he of the useless threads, baby steps ...

MM
~~:p

ROFL

:bravo:

keg in kc

03-29-2005, 08:08 PM

I should post important stuff like Rufus Dawes bullshit.Why not just go start a whole new thread with this brilliant idea as the body of your post. That'd be about par for the course.